Under present federal Supreme Court jurisprudence: The union which is the United States can never be dissolved by an independent action of one state (unless approved by Congress and/or the other states?)  An individual state may never secede. Apparently, only people rebel - the states remain a part of the Union.  Secession can be successful only if accomplished by force of arms (or agreement of the other states/Congress).

It doesn’t matter much what the Supreme Court jurisprudence is when it comes to this subject. Secession simply isn’t something that will ever really be stopped in the court system, so their opinion is meaningless. If a state believes it has the right to secede, and passes such a motion, then it would not recognize the Supreme Court’s authority to judge the matter.

Besides which, the rulings are fundamentally flawed. If states don’t have the right to secede without the approval of the other states, then they never would have had the right to form a union of states in the first place either, which means the Supreme Court has no valid standing to judge anything. You can’t have a right to self-governance that is valid only up to the point when you exercise it. That would not be a right at all.

“I dont want to find out, but how many divisions would it take to hold Georgia, if Georgia really wanted out?”

It would be a nightmare for both sides if it came to that. Just think of how many people living in any random state that you pick, have spent years seeing first hand how modern insurgency operations work. They may have been on the other side of those operations, but I’m sure they wouldn’t have a lot of trouble adopting those same tactics themselves, if they wanted to.

The SC has ruled, as indicated in this article, “...... The doctrine of secession is a doctrine of treason, and practical secession is practical treason, seeking to give itself triumph by revolutionary violence.”

I see serious problems for seccessionists here.

Interesting that, like some cultic churches - it’s great for a state to join the Union - but once you join, you can never leave.

Now, let’s put this all together.... White House puts out on their website, petitions to seceded from the nation. This administration approves the acquisition of millions of round of ammunition for the DHS and other depts for “no apparent reason.”

But, obviously, not all the people of a state will want secession. How does a state secede? It just says it secedes and that’s it? What do the people do who don’t want to secede but still want to live in their state? Would there be a civil war within the state? It can’t be a simple matter. It seems like there would be a lot of legal issues to iron out. I live in Louisiana and would love to see it secede, but I have a lot of friends and relatives who don’t agree. To me, it seems mind boggling.

How many Americans have died to protect this country and to keep us united? But what because we lost a couple of elections and gained an ObamaCare we're going to grab our marbles and crybaby all the way home to Texahomastan? Wanting to cut and run from the fight for your country is cowardice.

I'm sorry we live in a world where a biased media can take a fringe movement and tie it like a can to our tails, but this is the world we live in, which means that sometimes we have to very publicly point to these crybaby cowards and laugh at them, as though they were Alec Baldwin in 2004, packing for Canada.

Because if we don't do this, the media's going to make us own them, whether we want to own them or not.

These people are not only cowards for giving up the fight; they also get in the way of the fight, because the media uses them to constantly put us on defense and define who we are.

Let the secessionists leave the Republican Party, or whatever the threat is this time. We have to immediately mock and marginalize these people, not coddle lunacy and sympathize with stupid. At least if they can't be associated with the conservative movement, they're somebody else's problem.

It was illegal and high treason to rebel against the lawful, legal authority of the Crown of England under King George III and to defy his edicts and ‘laws’.

It was an even greater act of sedition and treason to suggest that the Colonies were of right, ought to be free and independent states from the Crown. We would define that today as secession. The Founders seceded from the Union established with England for over 150 years before July 2nd 1776.

It was settled by our Founders who took a risk of death for treason to declare that the Crown no longer had any legal authority over them. Once the legal authority was imposing tyranny and usurping the rights of liberty granted by God, the prince no longer had authority under God to rule over a free people.

Once the State/Crown - made itself higher than God’s Laws, then the people are no longer obligated to submit to such authority - and have, by right the duty to throw off such government and secure new guards for their liberty.

Secession is what our Founders initiated. It was a risk with a low chance of success - but it was decided by enough Godly and principled men that liberty was more important than life in chains and risked death to secure God’s authority as sovereign over their lives.

So why should we be any different just because the federal tyranny says, like the King of England, that Independence from their rule and authority is treason and unlawful?

If we would die free men, then their courts, congress and His Heinous Obama - have no power over us that we who are under the Law of Nature’s God, are required to submit to.

All they have is the ability to impose their tyranny by brute force and punishment. If we submit to such authority then we have broken the First Commandment and the Lord of Hosts is no longer our Sovereign.

If the Creator is our Sovereign - then we have as a duty to refuse, resist and not comply with those acts of tyranny being imposed by the threat of force.

If the Chinese invaded and put a gun to your head and said “submit to us or else!” would you cower - or resist? There is NO DIFFERENCE between a foreign enemy that would put a gun to your head and that of your family while confiscating your property - and the Domestic federal enemy who is doing the same damn thing.

They have no power over a free people except that which the people willingly surrender to them. Their laws, orders, decrees and rules are no longer of any authority over a people they intend to subjugate.

How does a state secede? It just says it secedes and thats it? What do the people do who dont want to secede but still want to live in their state?

My great-grandfather and his brother were living in Virginia in 1861 when it seceded from the Union. My great-grandfather joined a militia group of the Confederate States. By 1863, their part of the state had broken off and become West Virginia. His younger brother joined the Union Army and fought against his own brother and neighbors.

24
posted on 11/14/2012 8:41:24 PM PST
by Inyo-Mono
(My greatest fear is that when I'm gone my wife will sell my guns for what I told her I paid for them)

But, obviously, not all the people of a state will want secession. How does a state secede? It just says it secedes and thats it? What do the people do who dont want to secede but still want to live in their state? Would there be a civil war within the state? It cant be a simple matter. It seems like there would be a lot of legal issues to iron out. I live in Louisiana and would love to see it secede, but I have a lot of friends and relatives who dont agree. To me, it seems mind boggling.

There are still areas within Texas that are divided along lines that were created by the referendum in Feb, 1861.

25
posted on 11/14/2012 8:43:04 PM PST
by tpmintx
(Problem: People who work for a living are almost outnumbered by those who VOTE for a living (47%).)

The claim that secession is not possible is utterly preposterous. It means the nullification of one of the "self-evident truths" enunciated in the Declaration of Independence. It implies that, with the ratification of the Constitution, a system of government came into being which was and is not only perfect, but perfectly incorruptible, such that the government it established is forever incapable of becoming oppressive and illegitimate.

Supreme Court "jurisprudence" that does not recognize the natural right of secession is merely gas emitted by the putrefying corpse of the government established in 1789.

27
posted on 11/14/2012 8:47:33 PM PST
by Arthur McGowan
(If you're for sticking scissors in a baby girl's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)

The 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats were celebrated in the establishment MSM as the most intelligent generation ever!. They are now arguably that very establishment that praised them and they hold themselves and their ideological issue in even higher regard.

You initiated a policy to tolerate the Marxist-Alinsky radicals and let them rant; not only has it not ceased but was constantly augmented by decades of infiltration and indoctrination. You now have two Americas. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half statist and half free; I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.

31
posted on 11/14/2012 9:13:02 PM PST
by WilliamofCarmichael
(If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)

The old adage War doesnt determine right or wrong, only who survived applies here.

The American Civil War only proved that a more populous, wealthier, more industrialized nation can defeat a smaller populated, more agrarian nation so long as it doesnt lose its will to fight.

I dont want to find out, but how many divisions would it take to hold Georgia, if Georgia really wanted out?

Well, I'm a believer of the old adage from Robert A. Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" where the point was made that "naked force has resolved more issued in history than any other factor." I consider myself a Confederate apologist but you're right. The Confederates did give it a great try, had they won at Gettysburg, I'd say they would have had a chance, especially if the UK entered on their side and/or tried to broker a deal between the North and South. Getting recognition from some countries too puts feathers in the cap too. IIRC during the American Revolution, after we proved ourselves, we did get Spain, France, Prussia and Poland to recognize and help us although they had their own motivations for doing so.

The creation of West Virginia is interesting and illustrates an important principle in federal law relating to the Civil War, viz., the secessionist governments of the Confederacy were never recognized as having legal existence and the states which they purported to represent, legally, never left the Union. In the case of Virginia, after the Ordinance of Secession was approved state-wide, a rump government was formed consisting largely of the West Virginia counties and some other northern counties that had voted pro-Union. Francis Pierpoint became the Governor of Virginia and established the temporary state capitol in Alexandria, within Union lines. The Pierpoint government of Virginia (recognized by the Union as Virginia’s only legal government) consented to the creation of West Virginia — as required by Art. IV, Sec. 3, U.S. Constitution.

I love the idea of an independent Texas and any other red
states that want to come along with us.

However, I see as a more realistic scenario
(other than secession) that a liquidity crisis in the
Federal Government will drive a rolling downward spiral into
SHTF chaos. That will -in turn- allow a justification for a
“national emergency” style takeover by the military.

And it won’t be the kind of “national emergency” that
Barry O invokes to use those sweeping powers that he loves.
It will be the kind that has him replaced by a military
junta as a result of a declaration of “no confidence” in
his administration.

The union has 50 states now. And can shoot within a few feet of accuracy from several miles away.
What are foot soldiers going to defend themselves from naval warships, UAV’s, tanks, and aircraft they will never see or hear .

We must do what we have to do, I can go along with being hated on internet forums because I won’t back down in a head butting contest, its the internet fer crying out loud.

Now out in the sunshine on the steps leading to any governors office is the reality, then we petition, we gather together, we legally demand our states to band together against what is arguably a flagrant illegal control of Washington DC.

CA and TX are both republics and can legally secede anytime they want. However if a state or states decide to secede from the Union they are past careing what a court thinks. It would take force to keep them in.

We dont’ need secession to control the Federal govt. We just need for the states to start exercising the 10 the Ammendment.

44
posted on 11/15/2012 8:04:57 AM PST
by Georgia Girl 2
(The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)

Not necessarily true. The Afghans managed to outlast and fight Queen Victoria’s finest a century or so ago. They gave the Soviets a bloody nose and now they are giving us a hard time. Ever hear of asymmetrical warfare?

Of course I’ve heard of assymetric warfare, that’s exactly what I was talking about in my post. The person I was replying to was implying that our high-tech planes, bombs, and drones would make any resistance ineffective, which is just silly, considering that a bunch of stone age arabs were able to counter those same weapons for years in very recent history.

I like Glenn Beck's idea of going the 10th Amendment route first before secession although generally, I'm for the latter as well. The point is, that you agree with it, is the only way to answer the question is is secession does accour, will it be peaceful? If not and there is a fight, the seceding party must be able to either win outright (if the Confederates took DC and Lincoln as a POW) or at least be able to hold them off on their own or prove to the world they can stand up and hopefully get help from those sympathetic to the cause. If the South won a few key battles and/or Gettysburg, I think the North would have had to deal, they would be more drained.

It's like the old adage, if you're going to defy the king, you either have to wipe him out to the point where you make him say "Uncle" or make it so hard that he sees that it would be a lost cause and he'll leave you alone and go your way.

I think I replied to the wrong poster but still, we’ve made our point. It is sort of like our version of the Ewoks vs. the Empire in Star Wars. B-) Of course, there is one way, nukes, but that can backfire, the bad guys have to live here too. B-)

According to the supremacy clause of the Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2), U.S. Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. Treaties are "the supreme law of the land" within their sphere of powers, so a state can't simply declare that those laws don't apply to it or within its borders.

Secession would be possible if Congress agrees and enacts a law to that effect (or possibly through a constitutional amendment), but not unilateral secession by one state or group of states without the approval of Congress.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.